A memeber of staff recently completed the NEBOSH (Certificate) course and has now come back to work filled up with all this information, and has said that according to her learning, it is a "legal" requirement to have at least one fire evacuation test a year. I have contested this as it is my belief that this is only applicable to schools and that our factory does not "legally" have to have one a year (although we do try to do this), but she is adamamnt that it is a "legal" requirement and i disagree as the "Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 does not stipulate this, and in other documents i have read it says "should" which would make that a "suggested" minmum as opposed to a "legal" minimum .. can you imagine how many companies throughout the UK are, if this is the case, breaking the law as they never have them (and i know more that one in my locality). In fact as we have a complete fire risk assessment in place, and under went a recent visit from the Fire Authority who were fine with it, where does she get this impression that its a "legal" requirement under H&S when it is in fact the local fire authority that cover the fire requirements and not the HSE or NEBOSH ?? any ideas ??

Frank Don't know if this is of help http://www.hse.gov.uk/toolbox/fire.htm Part of the duties of the responsible person is to ensure your workers receive appropriate training on procedures they need to follow, including fire drills

Thats what i know too, but nowhere does it stipulate a set time, nor does it say "must" carry out an evacuation once a year. In documents i have found searching the internet, what it says is "should" that means there is no definative time allocated to evacuation tests.. am i right ??

What a great question frank56. :) Of course, some could say you're just being pedantic! (1) Why wouldn't you carry out at least one evacuation every year? (2) Using the basic legal requirement - A duty of care. (3) Yes, it's English law, so we use minimums, it's down to YOU (the employer) if you do the minimum, hope you go to jail in any subsequent incident and the prosecution will have a field day at your expense. (4) Yes, many companies don't, that is not an excuse. (5) Yes, you appear to be right, it doesn't say (that I can see in my nebosh notes) you must have evacuation drills, just that you must plan for them -- never noticed that before, thanks for pointing it out.

What you have to do is prove that your emergency plan works in my line of work Halthcare we do not do evacuation drills to do so in an acute hospital setting would cause much stress and strain to poorly patients. dare not think what could happen if you tried to evacuate a complex of 10 theatres when there operating So we do alternatives such as table top exercises for the fire teams , fire walk throughs with staff, annual manditory training, testing of alarms (in some areas), would not recomend testing alarms in the eye theatres when someone is getting there eye ball injected. In the community full drills from setting the alarm to assembly point, in the acute settings we dont even have assembly points,then there is testing maintenance etc the main thing is that you have to prove that the plan works 15(1)(a) is all about the emergency plan in relation to fire on the premises, in some areas this will require drills in others training, some areas both. I actually beleive staff gain more from proper walkthroughs, table tops than they ever will hearing a bell walking outside a roll call given then returning to the building. At the end of the day your staff have to be able to get from an area of danger to an area of safety if it takes a drill great if not then you need to do an alternative, its all done through risk assessment and if it does not come together in the moment of trouth you best be able to say why you had no training and no drills in what looks to be a large industrial setting

Frank I'm with you on this one - it does not say you have to carry out an evacuation every year, 6 months or 3 months. Psycho says it all and the idea of a desk top exercise is very good. If your junior is adamant that it is a legal requirement ask her to provide the piece of legislation that stipulates it, if she can't provide it tell them to be quiet and think about there actions before spouting off. Enthusiasm is all well and good but people need to get their facts right.

Thanks all for your valuable input, i knew i was right, and i think i have helped a couple realise that there is no "legal" requiremnet for fire drills, i know its good practice and we will be carrying them out again at some point to test the system still works, but i maybe having to speak to the NEBOSH training provider to say their tutor is giving out wrong and misleading information .. thanks all

Sorry guys must slightly disagree. Article 15 of the RRFSO states 'must'. Your factory will have risk assessed and should set out recommendations. I would always set out a defined frequency in relation to the assessed risk. I have not guidance notes to hand at present (while typing this) however, I have always worked to 'periodic' evacuation test procedures. I would advise to low risk sites once yearly and other sites based on risk category, more frequently. Agree with the original post "not a law" but you can see how NEBOSH courses can be misleading. As we see regularly in this forum, there is always different interpretations of law and guidance, and attendees sometimes misunderstand as they lack technical knowledge and understanding themselves.

it also says 15. —(1) The responsible person MUST— (a) ESTABLISH and, WHERE NECESSARY, Not law as identified with having,ESTABLISH and, WHERE NECESSARY

It might well be a risk assessment requirement to have an annual drill but that is not the same as it being a legal requirement.

Totally agree with this and that is what I would be making reference to on assessment of the premises. Article 15 is law and the whole "where necessary" argument is ludicrous! The only time this could possibly be taken into consideration would be low risk premises but again, training is a requirement, and I don't know how you will justify meeting this legal criteria without carrying out a fire evacuation drill? And, just to clarify, ACOPs are quasi legal i.e. have legal standing in a court of law as reference. Its similar to saying "well I can argue against that case law because of XYZ so dont worry about it" :-)

Frank looking at your very first post, you say that you try to have an annual drill anyway. So, I am left wondering whether you are making more out of this than you need and I can’t help but feel that you may have become ‘entrenched’ in a position that you’re finding difficulty removing yourself from. Your colleague may not be right (I am not saying that they are or not) but then who knew everything coming out of their NGC? Weren’t we all rather ‘gung ho’? I am still learning many years down the line from NGC/NGD etc etc. Overall I would say that any ‘system’ needs ‘testing’ periodically to see how well or not it works. We try to have a drill 6 monthly ish, and you know, we generally learn a little something after each. . The issue for me is does it add value, is the value it adds less than the cost of doing it, lost production, disruption etc. (I fully accept the point made at #9 that in some cases an evacuation may not be appropriate). Overall is it a ‘good’ thing to be doing (regardless of whether there is a strict legal requirement to do it or not), if so just do it. Although you may find some satisfaction or comfort from being ‘right’ in terms of the strict letter of the law, or by seeking consensus from this forum (and I don’t think you have got that) it will do little for your relationship or credibility with your colleague. Perhaps take a step back and have a see if you have bigger fish to fry!

Are you suggesting that the guy flipping burgers should practice walking away from the van at prescribed frequencies just to practice?

Fire risk assessment or legislation review would be a good place to start; but I can imagine many factories which could escape having to perform a drill if an investigation took place from alegal or insurance body.